The Minnesota Renewable Energy Society Incorporated

Nonprofit profile at a glance

EIN
411379265
IRS 990-EZ coverage
2010–2025
Forms available
Form 990 2024, Form 990-EZ 2025, Form 990-N 2007
Location
Minneapolis, MN, USA
Phone
6123084757
Rating
70
Verdict
SUPPORTED
Rating confidence
Moderate

Official website

Reported finances

Revenue
$33,082
Expenses
$31,985
Assets
$68,411

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Amounts in USD.

Leadership & pay

10 people listed

People named in this filing

  • MARK WEBER (CHAIR)
  • DOUG SHOEMAKER (VICE CHAIR)
  • ELEANOR MAHON (SECRETARY)

Selected names, not a complete roster or a statement of current roles. Open leadership details for the complete filed list.

Source: IRS Form 990-EZ. Selected filing: tax year 2025. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.

Overview

Mission

To advance a sustainable society and a renewable energy economy through education, leadership, and example.

What it reported doing in 2025

Mres worked with the Minnesota pollution control agency to train eighty volunteers to staff the eco experience area of the Minnesota state fair. The volunteers explained the different clean energy technologies to 210,375 people during the 12-day run of the state fair. Between the setup, running of the fair and teardown, the volunteers donated 2140 hours. A new exhibit helped the volunteers explain how personal actions affect co2 emissions and climate change. These activities educate the general public on how renewable energy works and how they can participate in its benefits. This education is conducted in spanish and english. We formed relationships with passive house Minnesota and the climate reality project for this activity.

Operating model

Revenue model
Donor-supported. 86% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
Distribution model
Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.

The verdict

SUPPORTED - The filed numbers largely add up and a large share of available resources goes toward mission work. Program spending has declined or grown slowly and expenses are high relative to revenue.

Rating breakdown

  • Financial Efficiency: 63
  • Transparency & Controls: 82
  • Sustainability: 45
  • Growth: 60

Detailed rating inputs

Financial Efficiency

  • Mission deployment rate: 63.3%; rating input score 63
  • Program expense ratio: 64.4%; rating input score 64

Transparency & Controls

  • Consistency checks: 100%; rating input score 100; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Major donor itemization: Limited

Sustainability

  • Operating margin: 3.3%; rating input score 51; 51st percentile among comparable filings
  • Total-asset coverage ratio: 2.14; rating input score 67; 67th percentile among comparable filings
  • Liabilities to assets ratio: Limited
  • Officer compensation ratio: 20.3%; rating input score 8; 8th percentile among comparable filings

Growth

  • Program expense growth: -11.7% per year; rating input score 0; 26th percentile among comparable filings
  • Revenue growth: 2.1% per year; rating input score 100; 59th percentile among comparable filings
  • Asset growth: 3.2% per year; rating input score 100; 50th percentile among comparable filings

Details

  • Where the money goes: 63.3% of revenue deployed · 64.4% of spending went to programs
  • Governance: Filed governance answers
  • Accomplishments: 4 filed program accomplishments · $21K in reported program spending
  • Leadership: top reported pay $0 · 10 people listed
  • Consistency: 6 of 6 current checks pass
  • Schedules: 2 filed schedules
  • Filing history: 13 filing years from 2010 to 2025
  • Contacts: How to reach this organization
  • Money network: 2 filed money-flow records
  • Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
  • People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.

Key Signals

Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.

  • High — Growth: Program expense growth scored 0/100.
  • Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 51/100.
  • High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 8/100.